Beavah

Yah, I reckon the BSA background check is just a fig leaf, eh? Friends of mine in law enforcement and criminal law say they're quite easy to spoof. So folks, please don't rely on da BSA's checks for any level of safety. Follow YP, and stay sharp! If da BSA were serious about it, they'd do fingerprint checks. No risk of havin' folks write down (and lose) a SSN. Much less ability to "fake." State police destroy the cards and don't keep records by law in most places. And that way yeh also don't get into investigatin' people's financial and credit history the way the BSA checks can. One of the sadnesses of the BSA's rules has been that some law enforcement folks have been dropped from leadership positions because their employment rules prohibit release of SSN. Makes it too easy for a crook to retaliate against an officer. No question that the checks are good PR, though. Beavah

Yah, and that SE made quality council by spendin' his time gettin' folks to do (or worse, fudge!) paper busywork! Good on yeh, scoutldr, for choosin' not to be a part of it. There's better ways for good volunteers to spend their time, like helpin' kids! Eamonn, ain't nothin' wrong with gathering information, as an integral part of a bigger picture effort to provide help, service, program, etc. Just usually when you've got that kind of bigger thing going, gatherin' the information is incidental and not worth mentioning. Scoutldr's comments just struck me as bein' the other kind of approach, eh? And apparently I was right. My hope is that district and council volunteers who read these threads come to realize they can participate at those levels creatively and offer real service... without lettin' themselves get caught up in the odd, oft dysfunctional dance of professional evaluation pressures and metrics. Simply refusin' to do dumb tasks is OK. Good folks like scoutldr should spend their hard-earned volunteer hours in ways that really matter. And if along the way a poor SE isn't able to fake "Quality Council", so much the better, eh? Beavah

But what's the right answer to the Buddhist scout, for example, who doesn't believe in a god in the way that Judeo-Christian faiths do? Who's lookin' for "right" answers? I've sat boards with many a Buddhist and Hindu scout. Can't say it's ever been an issue. Da kids aren't as dumb or nitpicky as us adults. They know what we mean when we ask about God and reverence, and don't assume we're bein' obtuse. They answer honestly about their beliefs. Works great. Yah, pack, I'm not sure about "Thrifty" eh? But I've been at BOR's where "Trustworthy" was an issue for a lad, and "Courteous" and "Kind." Even one where "Clean" came up, because two of his recommendation letters commented about the lad's foul mouth. And I've certainly seen lads expelled from troops for serious violations of Trust, or Kindness. All these things go together. IMO, it's the adults who get all wrapped up in knots over God questions, not kids. Beavah

A simple request, such as "where is your troop going to summer camp this year" would go ignored. Out of all the units in the district, I would be lucky to get one or two responses. I never understood that. I tend to think the attitude was "none of your durn business", when they got a request from a silver looper. Yah, didn't want to hijack da original thread, eh? I've watched Camping Chairs go through the same thing scoutldr describes for years. I feel his pain. Da question on my mind has always been : "Why on earth would anybody in a unit respond to this?" A call from a stranger who's not tryin' to be helpful to their program askin' about their summer camp and the number of kids who went. Sort of intrusive, even just a little bit creepy, eh? Especially if the guy isn't well known as someone who has been really helpful to the unit in the past. Just so a district can do its paperwork and get its award (and perhaps because they can't be bothered to look at da tour permit the unit filed for camp...) I reckon a lot of districts slip into that sort of thing, eh? Maybe it's partly that districts have gotten too big, so it's too much time as scoutldr describes. Still, I encourage folks to set the silly paperwork and statistics aside. Doin' that alone is just pretending to do service. Instead, re-imagine what a district camping chair, or advancement chair, or membership person, or commish might do to be of service. Publish reports of unit trips that give others good ideas? Provide lists of places to go camping / contacts / activities / itinerary? Summer Camp reviews? Keep an eye on Tour Permits to see how (and where) each unit is gettin' out? Work with da UC to enhance each unit's outdoor program? Identify backpacking/paddling/winter/family camping experts who can go work with a unit to enhance their program? Help active outdoor units pair up with less active ones to give 'em ideas? Lots of ways to be creative. Collectin' statistics without actually bein' helpful has always seemed to be just a waste of a good volunteer's time, and of unit goodwill. No matter that those statistics show up on evaluation and award paperwork. Leave it blank. Folks should spend their volunteer time doin' good works, not busy work. Beavah

Yah, seems like da "none of your business" answers could be used as a response to a lot of questions, eh? How are you Trustworthy? To whom or what are you Loyal? Christian types might take the words of Jesus to heart, and when giving alms "not let the right hand know what the left is doing." So a question about "How are you Helpful?" might be properly greeted with "that's personal, and between me and Him who sees what I do in private." Is it Courteous to brag about oneself and talk about how Courteous you have been? A lad might say, "I'm sorry, but I don't think it's appropriate to respond to that." School records and other records of learning and such are even legally protected as private. Is "how have you kept yourself mentally awake?" a fair question? Personally, I think all the questions are fair, provided they're asked of a friend by a group of (older) friends, eh? In that context, they're an opportunity for a lad to give witness, not to cast his pearls before swine. If they aren't bein' asked by a group of friends, well, then we're probably not doin' our jobs. As a district/council review member, I've only rarely seen an unfriendly tone at an EBOR, and sadly it tends to be the district/council folks rather than the unit folks who do that. Best to find other ways for 'em to volunteer, eh? Beavah

Yah, I'm wonderin' what da "major implications" are for somethin' that's just an optional piece of paperwork, eh? Care to fill us in, eghiglie? Sometimes we adults make paperwork mountains out of molehills, eh? Beavah

Yah, I disagree with the notion that a Committee Chair can act as sole chooser and appointer of positions, eh? That's not the intent of the BSA at all. That would make the CC essentially the same thing as a COR. When there's a signature line on an application for the Committee Chair, the CC is signing on behalf of the committee. The signature represents that the committee as a group authorizes the action (whether by vote or consensus or whatever, eh?). Absent a decision endorsed by the whole committee, the CC has no independent, personal authority the way the COR or IH does. They speak with "authority" only when they speak on behalf of (and with da approval of) the committee. At all other times, they're just a regular committee member. Same as with a chairman of any board of directors, or any public body. Unless, of course, da CO wants the committee to run that way, eh? But then they should appoint the same person as COR/CC. Twoscouts, I feel your pain, eh? I really discourage husband/wife SM/CC combinations, especially at the upper division programs. If your DE and UC are really on board as yeh suggest, as a commish I'd approach the IH and COR and recommend a gentle change at the next recharter, movin' to a new CC. That can be handled with finesse and respect if done right. Opening it up to nominations and a committee vote is fine, too. That havin' been said, many of the individual things yeh mention really seem worth gettin' too upset over, eh? Forgetting to tell the SPL about visitors is an ordinary mistake not even worth discussin' at an adult level - that's the SPL's job to take up with the SM. Now, the DE not recommending the troop is more disturbin'. That suggests there's lots of other stuff goin' on in the unit; but it also is poor behavior for a DE. So I'd say two things at once. One is "be aware this might just be the normal noise from workin' with people". Don't make mountains out of molehills, or let annoying personalities get in the way of focusin' on supporting the SM and the kids. Grin and bear it. At the same time, if there really are deeper structural issues that go beyond small annoyances and such, or just for general program health, encourage a few key folks to have a conversation about whether it's time to rotate the CC position. Not a coup, done with finesse and respect, the CC taking some other important role, but opening up the process a bit with the next CC bein' recommended by the committee, and accepted for a fixed term. That has to be done by the DE/UC/COR/SM, inspired by a nudge from a few key current MCs. Beavah

I think it's nice of 'em to offer. I think it's just fine for you to ask 'em to pay for all of your expenses - gas, lunch, cards, copying cost for handouts, etc. In fact, I think that's to be encouraged. Sometimes I reckon we take advantage of volunteers by expecting 'em to cover things themselves. That's fine for an occasional class or for those of us who can afford it, eh? But that isn't true for everyone. The expectation should be that we don't make a trainer pay any of da costs of training unless he/she volunteers to do so. Off da cuff, I'm not aware of any prohibition on chargin' an hourly rate and such as an independent contractor; certainly most councils charge more for some training than cost of cards. But I think that's contrary to the spirit of the movement myself. Beavah

Both gasoline and kerosene shall be kept in well-marked, approved containers (never in a glass container) and stored in a ventilated, locked box at a safe distance (a minimum of 20 feet) from buildings and tents. Yah, that's a riot, eh? I expect all of us carry ventilated lock boxes with us on our backpacking trips. I was surprised to find this back in G2SS. Seems like I remember it from years ago, somethin' that got pulled out of the NCS camp standards (from OSHA proper storage of volatiles regulations) and inserted inappropriately into G2SS. I remember it finally gettin' removed from G2SS. Seems like someone resurrected it. I'm more disturbed by the other bits, like "when lighting a stove... open the stove valve quickly for two full turns and light... then adjust down." If anybody actually read G2SS and followed those instructions, they'd be dangerous. Beavah

Yah, I can't say I've ever been impressed by either a shirt or a suit. Da Scouters I respect at first blush are the ones who have a kid come up to them, and there is respect and admiration in the kid's eyes. At the support levels, the volunteers and professionals I respect are ones who never talk for more than ten minutes without bringin' the conversation back around to "How do we best serve kids?" Or the ones who have a front-line, volunteer scouter who does great work with kids come up to them, and there is respect and collegial admiration in the scouter's eyes. But if I've got to pick a uniform, I reckon my favorites are the ones with a bare uniform, eh? Not jaded, wide eyed, willin', and ready to start the adventure. No awards yet and not even aware of awards. Just willin' to put on green and tan (or grey and green, or white...) because they care about kids. Beavah

Yah, I reckon worryin' about burnin' a few ounces of white gas to make dinner when yeh burned dozens of gallons or more gettin' the troop to the camping area and back is straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Yeh release a lot more CO2 (and other gunk) into the air with a fire than a stove, just because it's so much less efficient. I'm fond of cookin' on fires myself, in areas and at times when the risk is low, and doin' it right. But I've also been to lots of places where there's been way too much traffic and fire damage, eh? Beavah

Yah, I'm pretty creative, but I'd have a hard time doin' Law MB at camp. You'd have to turn it into a class instead of a mentorin' experience, and fudge 2-3 major requirements. I think Dentistry might win, though. American Business and Labor would also be pretty tough, I reckon. My least favorites are da same as Lisa'bobs, eh? The Citizenship badges, Family Life, Communications, Personal Management, even Personal Fitness really don't have any business bein' done at camp. Beavah

I am still thinking about the mechanics of how patrol recruiting might work, to ensure quality patrols and to keep certain scouts from ending up on the sidelines. Yah, don't think too much about it, eh? Just set da goals and expectations and let your kids work it out. Sounds like they really have it together. I figure the rules should be simple: * No child left out, no feeling of "last one picked," and a "good fit" for each patrol (friends and personalities and such). * A reasonable effort to make sure each patrol is "viable" - has enough guys who participate regularly, and has enough range of experience to have both growing leaders and younger guys for 'em to lead. Your top "natural leaders", if yeh set the example, will take on your "hard case" boys as a personal project and challenge. Some years back, I remember talkin' to a PL at a summer camp while he was down leading one of his (younger) patrol members to the health lodge for meds. The younger scout was clearly Aspergers/Autistic spectrum. Given how the older boy cared for the younger, I thought they might be brothers, but I was wrong. "Yeah, I've got to watch out for Pete sometimes. But it's cool. And he's really funny. Plus, he's a super-strong hiker." I thought he was a TG who had been assigned to help the boy, but he said that he was the boy's PL. There hadn't been an assignment, he wanted Pete in his patrol, because he thought he'd be the best PL to work with him. That young PL didn't see a problem kid. He saw a fellow scout and a leadership challenge he was up to. I reckon dat's the kind of Scouting stuff we all love, eh? Beavah

Even the "fly" has issues with an six to eight quart "pasta pot" 8 quarts = 2 gallons = 17.6 lbs of fluid plus da weight of the pot. That's a lot of weight in a dangerous, boiling substance to be entrusted to a middle schooler. Investin' in some more appropriate cookware seems like it would be well worth it, safety-wise. Boiling water scalds are among Scouting's most frequent severe injuries. Beavah

Clarity would especially be nice if insurance coverage is at stake. Does the insurance apply if you are found to have failed to follow BSA safety policy? Yah, Tawahk, there's some fine threads on da insurance issue for you to peruse. Short answer to your question is that BSA insurance coverage is not related to BSA guidelines and policy documents. Same as if you wrote a policy manual for your family, your homeowner's insurance coverage would not be voided if your wife broke one of your policies. There's a difference between internal BSA documents and da real world of insurance and jurisprudence, eh? So yeh can relax on that score. I think you're also gonna chase your tail if yeh try to read BSA documents like they're Federal Regulations, where lots of professionals and citizens with special interests try to make all definitions clear and conflict-free. In the big scheme of things, BSA is a small organization publishin' youth program materials. We don't pay 'em enough to employ a continuity editor . Besides, if you're doin' your taxes this week, yeh know that the Federal Regulations aren't always a masterpiece of clarity either, eh? Gern, I think you're runnin' into a classic kid-thing, eh? Kids are a conservative lot. They're afraid of doin' anything new. They might not be good at it. They might look bad in front of their peers. It might not be fun. The unknown is a scary place. I think yeh have to enthuse and push and pull to get 'em past that initial reluctance is all. Once one group has an adventure "solo", the barriers are down, it's somethin' that is no longer unknown. For the parents too, eh? Beavah

Yah, dat's a new one, eh? I could never imagine that someone would find a way to grade-inflate that award. But interpreting days as different than nights so they'd only have to spend 50 typical camping "days" out is remarkable. I reckon the award is supposed to be a challenge, not somethin' that every scout should hit by regular participation before he reaches high school. 100 days should mean 100 days in the field. But here's a thought: why not ask your kids, CeeJay? I'm willin' to bet that once they get away from adults putterin' things up, 90% of 'em would say it means 100 full days out. The kids I know would be embarrassed to wear a 100 days patch for spendin' only 50 in the woods. Beavah

Yah, if I'm rememberin' right, Kudu had somethin' on his web site about his troop switchin' to lightweight gear. Yah, here it is: http://www.inquiry.net/outdoor/equipment/lightweight_camping.htm He may want to comment further. I've seen plenty of kids usin' lightweight stoves over the years. The things might not look real stable, but they're pretty darn good if yeh don't overload 'em. I'm talkin' things like MSR's whisper and dragonfly series. Key is not to be tryin' to cook for 12 people on one stove. That kind of big pot of boilin' water probably isn't safe for kids to handle no matter what the stove size is, eh? Other thing is to keep kids from sittin' at picnic tables while they cook. Standin' is OK, but sittin' you're just a target for spilled liquids. Havin' seen a lot of troops over the years, I can say that there's funny ways in which da gear makes the troop. If yeh have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If yeh have a trailer, yeh only tend to look for trailer sites for most of your trips, and yeh shy away from lots of real navigation and such. If you have flexible gear, yeh usually have a wider-rangin' outdoor program. Not "oh, no, we've got to spend a couple of months gettin' backpacking gear together" but rather, "hey, we can switch from da canceled camporee to the North Country Trail next weekend, let's do that!" Beavah

Yah, do we let 'em drive? Seems like after a short bit of instruction and supervision (very short compared to the amount of time they spend in Scoutin'), we get out of the car and let 'em go solo. Small trips first, then longer ones. And cars are a lot more dangerous than the woods. Wake up and smell the coffee, people! Our middle schoolers, whether we want to admit it or not, are makin' decisions about drugs, alcohol, sex, weapons, and all kinds of other things when we aren't there to supervise. If we don't give 'em chances to solo and develop a sense of independence, confidence, and judgment in relatively safe places like the woods, they are gonna be sheep to the slaughter in the dangerous places like schools, towns, and colleges. Patrol campin' without adults should be an important part of any scout troop, IMO. That havin' been said, I think same-age patrols cut down on this a lot. Yeh wouldn't necessarily want a group of all 11-year-olds or 12-year-olds campin' alone, at least dependin' on the site. By the time they're 14-15 and in high school, "organized" high-adventure may take the place of independence too. Rather than let 'em be independent backpackin' for a weekend, we've got to organize a whitewater raft trip where they have to be adult-led and supervised. And I think a few states out there have made youth "protection" such a legal nightmare that effectively scout leaders who let their kids camp alone would run afoul of the child abuse and neglect statutes. Criminal stuff, not civil. So I agree it's gettin' tougher in today's culture of fear. But I think if we care about buildin' character, we've got to fight to keep some adult-free independence and adventure available for our scouts. Beavah

Yah, Horizon, like many other old-timers, I'm on the opposite side of this from MarkS. I think Scoutin' works a bit better when patrols are mixed-age, and the patrols have a long-term existence in da troop that outlives any individual group of boys. Older boys have real opportunities to lead lads who need leadership (not just pretend to lead peers while hangin' out). Middle boys get a chance to grow by helping with younger ones and feeling knowledgeable/important and developing their own leadership skills. Young boys get to see and learn from watching older ones, not just being told how in a class. I expect there was a reason why BSA Scoutin' used mixed-age "legacy" patrols for 80 years, eh? I was a patrol setup that had demonstrated success over and over again. I think what your boys are proposin' is great, and shows that they really have bought into the "servant leader" role in Scouting, and that they care enough about their patrol (Patrol Method Lives!!) that they want it to outlast their tenure. You are to be commended as an adult leader for growin' such a fine troop. I think this is something that you discuss with your PL's. Share your concerns, but let 'em come up with ways to address them or choose to set the priorities differently. I think you'd really like da benefits to Patrol Method the "legacy" nature of patrols will bring your program. My guess is once one patrol starts down this path, they're gonna pull your troop that way, or at least open things up. And then, before yeh know it, there might be more patrol pride, and patrol competitions, and gee... more of that Scoutin' magic. Have at it! Beavah

Yah, Gern, that was GW not Ed, eh? I agree with Neil for a different reason. Yes/No questions aren't the best for a BOR. Better to ask things like "you promised to do your duty to God... what do you think your duty to God is?" So, everybody raise their hands who have had a boy declare he's an atheist at a BOR. I know I have. All kinds of reasons for that. Feelin' rebellious, having doubts, tryin' to figure things out. Had a CC approach me a few years ago with one of those, an 8th grader at a Star BOR. The man was all serious-like. "Should we throw him out?" I just laughed. Da lad is 14 for cryin' out loud. Be happy he's strugglin' with faith and not drugs. Just engage him where he's at, I said, and show him that God is real by the example you and your fellow adult leaders set in da troop. Beavah P.S. My wise old Beavah advice didn't help, eh? That was a fussy, prune-faced bunch in that unit. They eventually drove the boy off just by how they treated him. Yeh win some and yeh lose some in da commissioner racket.

Yah, gotta second ScoutNut on this, eh? Scouts aren't allowed to drive NASCAR either, but they can sure attend a race, talk to drivers, see demos, sit behind the wheel, and learn stuff, eh? They can't skydive, but they can go to an airfield and talk to skydivers and watch skydivers and put on the equipment and play on the practice rigs and even fly in the airplane that takes skydivers up, eh? Same with martial arts. Da point behind the prohibition is that combat martial arts trainin', like competitive football, has a high risk of injury. But that's not what we're talkin' about in a one-night visit, eh? Besides, I reckon martial arts programs are a perfect cross-marketing opportunity for scout units. Introduce scouts to martial arts; introduce martial arts kids to scouts. Great way to grow membership while capitalizin' on compatible activities. Sounds like your pack is ahead of the game in recruitin', NHawk. That's a good thing to be supportive of. Beavah

Yah, hmmm... IMO, not worth spendin' too much time worrying about, eh? I suppose if yeh want you can follow the guidance and always stay in a spot where yeh can get to a lightning-protected building as soon as yeh can hear any thunder. Never go into the backcountry. Never go campin'. Just look at all those people who were hurt or killed by lightning while doin' those things! Of course lots more people are seriously injured by elevators each year. There's a little bit of "obvious" here, eh? If yeh can avoid it, don't hang out in an open field, open water, or at a high point / high ridge / under da tallest tree when there's a good sized storm brewin'. And if yeh can't avoid it then I suppose spreadin' out makes some sense. The other recommendations yeh year at these "safety seminars" are just a riot. I suppose squattin' down might make yeh feel like you're doin' something (for all da good that last 3' of height matters to a jolt of electricity that's travelin' several miles). I reckon lightning, falling trees and/or rocks, biting insects and critters, etc. are just part of the risks of being alive in the outdoors. In most parts of the country, yeh just can't avoid being out in storms if yeh want to go camping. Just like airborne pollution, automobiles & machinery, electricity, gasoline & combustion chemicals, and elevators are part of da (more serious!) risk of being alive in modern cities and towns. Beavah

Yah, hi NHawk! Welcome to da forums, eh! That was a good rant. I enjoyed it. And I hope yeh feel better. You're a wise one to come vent to a bunch of strangers like us, and protect your son's cub experience from "The New Guy who Sees Everything That's Wrong but Not Anything That's Right And Who Hasn't Put Any Time In Yet In Terms of Hard Work or Training." That's a good start. No pack is goin' to be perfect, and since you've been around cubs has moved more to equal "do your best" advancement and grade level progress, eh? Yeh aren't gonna change it in the less-than-a-year your son has left in cubbing. I'd say Grin and Baloo it, eh?! All the kids might be gettin' their awards at the same time, kinda like school grades, but yeh can be proud that your son is earnin' A's while not all his den-mates are. Jump in a bit more next year, maybe takin' the lead for helpin' boys and families with Arrow of Light and crossover to a troop (?). That way yeh can do something fun and truly helpful for everyone, while helping the boys find a strong troop program to continue in. And be excited that your son found Scouting in the 4th grade, thanks to this pack's recruitment drive. I think havin' 8 years to share something like Scouting with your son is a wonderful gift, no matter what warts it comes with. Beavah

Yah, I think da only problem is when a scout gets surprised by somethin' on an Eagle Board. If there have been "God conversations" at First Class, Star, and Life, then they certainly won't be a surprise at Eagle, eh? And the boy may have actually thought about it and grown over that time, because adults opened him up to dialog about something he hadn't given much thought to before. I think God, relationship to God, duty to God, reverence, etc. are all fine headings that encompass a whole mess of conversation that can be simply delightful with a young Eagle candidate. They can also become ugly or odd if an adult takes 'em that way because of a personal hangup. Of course, dat's true about "Loyal" or "Obedient" or "Mentally Awake" too, eh? Faith is part of the public discourse, part of personal character, part of what makes the world go 'round. It shouldn't be put under a basket or shoved into a closet as though it's somethin' dirty. Scouting is one of the only places a lad can have a conversation about faith with adults, because it's become "taboo" in school and many other areas. I say, let such conversations flourish, in good will. They belong as part of an Eagle Board of Review. Beavah

Yah, I've got to second scotteng here, eh? Beavah's rule number 29: If a unit is spendin' any time worrying about counting camping nights for 2nd class/1st class or Camping MB, then they've got a serious problem with their use of da Outdoor Method (or their understandin' of advancement). Rather than spend their time on accounting tricks for days and nights, they should be spendin' their time havin' fun outdoors with kids. You know...ScOUTING! B